Video critical of problems effects of PSR and other worker failing

[blue streak 1]

 

How America's Largest Railroads are Ruining our Supply Chains - YouTube

 

[Euclid]

The author recommends the solution of nationalization of U.S. railroads.  He says this is the solution to the grievances surrounding poor working conditions, and it will also provide better rail service to the public.  Are there any downsides to nationalization?  The author does not cite any downsides.  To what extent does the public and railroad Labor approve of nationalization of the railroads?

 

The public probably has not developed firm opinions about railroad nationalization, but what about Labor?  Surely they have given considerable thought to it.  Would it give them the improved working condition they are asking for?

[Flintlock76]

Ever hear the old saying "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing?"

While the guy behind the video makes some points it's his "little knowledge" that bothers me a bit.  And not that I really  mind (I've been around) but his resorting to "potty words" to make some points makes me wonder about his grasp of this or other subjects. 

The "little knowledge" thing is the reason I keep my mouth shut when the professional railroaders on this Forum speak.  I just listen or ask a question and don't attempt to "quarterback."

And of course he's missed the fact that those 19th Century land grants had to be paid for, they weren't gifts.

[Overmod]

The land grant excuse is a stalking horse for the idea of forced nationalization of the track and infrastructure, whether to implement an 'iron ocean' or a quid pro quo for Government funding of mandated ECP and electrification.  The 'guy behind the video' has evidently never read his Kneiling, and if he did it might inform some of his thinking in a better operational sense.

Perhaps we'll see a sort of 21st-Century Hepburn Act that mandates no company owning track and running trains at the same time.  Just 'spin off' the real-estate assets from the operating company, and be mean 'n clean running PSR traffic expediently... and seeing who gets the more dedicated employees by being more human about hours and discipline...

The fact that the operating model failed dismally in Britain, to the extent an actual stage play was written about it, does not mean it couldn't be done better here. 

[Overmod]

Flintlock76

And of course he's missed the fact that those 19th Century land grants had to be paid for, they weren't gifts.

He hasn't missed it, he just hasn't looked for it.

The whole idea of 10% discount, free priority carriage wouldn't have registered -- he saw 'grants' and assumed it was both free and immensely valuable when given.  I don't expect it will be long before he gets around to the mineral rights and other "Government-sponsored resource exploitation" or whatever.

Just mention the OPB 'scam' in WWII where they cobbled together 'equivalent routes' involving as much nominally land-grant mileage as possible.  It's in the book about 'Decade of the Trains', if you need a quick and positive reference entry point to put in the video comments.

Then move from there to the 'wartime' 10% passenger tax that... conveniently... didn't get repealed until passenger trains were well on the way out.  All that aggregate revenue should be accounted for at present value if the land-grants are...

[SD60MAC9500]

 

Flintlock76

Ever hear the old saying "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing?"

While the guy behind the video makes some point it's his "little knowledge" that bothers me a bit.  And not that I really  mind (I've been around) but his resorting to "potty words" to make some points makes me wonder about his grasp of this or other subjects. 

The "little knowledge" thing is the reason I keep my mouth shut when the professional railroaders on this Forum speak.  I just listen or ask a question and don't attempt to "quarterback."

And of course he's missed the fact that those 19th Century land grants had to be paid for, they weren't gifts.

 

Ohh the good ole land grant myth.. That a majority of railroads benefited from them. When this is far from the truth. I need to find and cite the reference. Last time I checked only 8% of rail mileage benifited from land grants.

I watched this video a few days ago and found it lacking in depth and intelligence. He may be right on some points concerning labor, and service. However the majority of his presentation is balderdash, I'll agree with Wayne and his consensus. Adding the dropping of F-bombs and other manner of language doesn't prove you have knowledge of a subject or to affirm a conviction..

His thought's about how nationalization is some sort of panacea is even more demonstrative of his lack of railroading knowledge. He then goes on to praise the USSR rail system without in depth knowledge of the system. Yet a simple research would show.. We achieve the lowest cost per ton mile here in North America thanks to efficiency of aggregation per unit...

His videos will cause many more to be ignorant of how our rail system really works..

 

 

[Euclid]

I think the author’s point is that if you believe that railroad management will never do the right thing for customers or employees, you have to get rid of management.   And nationalization is the only way to accomplish that goal.  So I am just wondering what employees think of that solution to the problem.  I would expect that nationalization would bring massive improvements in working conditions. 

[Overmod]

Nationalization would likely get rid of railroad retirement.  The discussion probably stops right there. 

And it would be nationalization of the infrastructure long, long before the government shells out for all the operating assets and gets into train operations 'and all that implies'.

[azrail]

First off... the gov't doesn't enough money to buy the railroads-including all of the short lines, and we don't seize assets without payment.

Second...Nationalization was tried during WW1..didn't work and it killed off several railroads (like the Colorado Midland) by diverting traffic.

Third..do you think these employees will be any happier working for Uncle Sam's choo-choos than a private company? Ask postal workers!

Look at all of the gov't run railroads overseas...most of them are employment agencies, not efficient transport systems.

[azrail]

And you replace it with some politically appointed poobah who can't spell train, who is only in there as doing a favor for the regime in office? We have enough of those in our gov't agencies.

[Euclid]

Overmod

Nationalization would likely get rid of railroad retirement.  The discussion probably stops right there. 

I am sure that the government would come up with a compensation/retirement package that would please labor.  Clearly, the primary issue is that management must change almost all of their thinking or they must go.  What would people say if management reached out to Labor and said that for the good of the industry, they were willing to make the changes needed to give the job acceptable conditions?

[azrail]

The same conditions are in the trucking and airline industries, you want to nationalize them next, Comrade? We have too many soft people in this country anymore.

[tree68]

SD60MAC9500

Ohh the good ole land grant myth.. That a majority of railroads benefited from them. When this is far from the truth. I need to find and cite the reference. Last time I checked only 8% of rail mileage benefitted from land grants.

Not to mention that most maps (such as the one he used) grossly over-represented the actual area included in the land grants.  At least that's my understanding...

 

[Overmod]

Euclid

What would people say if management reached out to Labor and said that for the good of the industry, they were willing to make the changes needed to give the job acceptable conditions?

They'd say this:

followed by variations on "that'll be the sunny Friday".

Have you been reading Bellamy's "Looking Backward" recently?  He had a very similar premise...

[diningcar]

Land Grants are missunderstood by many, and deliberately wrongly portrayed by some. Following is some information from the time Land Grants were created:

In 1850, when the first railroad land grant was made, there were 1.4 billion acres of public domain unsettled, and which was for sale. Senator William R. King, who later became Secretary of State, said " The best and highest interests of the people of the United States ... is to bring them into cultivation and settlement in the shortest space of time and under the most favorable auspices."

The railroad land grants accomplished the objective set for them - and more. Prior to 1850 the government offered land for sale at $1.25 per acre. There were few takers. When the Land Grant legislation was passed the price was raised to $2.50 per acre and where railroads were assured, the land was eagerly purchased. The  Federal Government immediately benefited financially.

Benefits to the government also resulted from the reduced shipping rates that were a part of the granting legislation. The reduced rates were finally repealed in October 1946; the ICC determined the government had received $1.25 billion from them.  With the government's ability to sell land along the new railroads at double, or more, than its previous price and receiving the reduced rates it can be reasonably determined that land grants to railroads were a particularly good deal to the USA. 

[MidlandMike]

Overmod

Nationalization would likely get rid of railroad retirement.  The discussion probably stops right there.

The Railroad Retirement Board is a Federal Government agency.  Why would nationalization affect that?

[Flintlock76]

SD60MAC9500

 

 

 

Flintlock76

Ever hear the old saying "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing?"

While the guy behind the video makes some point it's his "little knowledge" that bothers me a bit.  And not that I really  mind (I've been around) but his resorting to "potty words" to make some points makes me wonder about his grasp of this or other subjects. 

The "little knowledge" thing is the reason I keep my mouth shut when the professional railroaders on this Forum speak.  I just listen or ask a question and don't attempt to "quarterback."

And of course he's missed the fact that those 19th Century land grants had to be paid for, they weren'

 

 

SD60MAC9500

He then goes on to praise the USSR rail system without in depth knowledge of the system.

I wonder if he's one of those people who thinks Communism hasn't worked because it hasn't been tried by the "right people."

 

[Overmod]

MidlandMike

Overmod

Nationalization would likely get rid of railroad retirement.  The discussion probably stops right there.

The Railroad Retirement Board is a Federal Government agency.  Why would nationalization affect that?

The shoe may be on the other foot when the Government is the one paying instead of the one mandating.

[zugmann]

azrail

The same conditions are in the trucking and airline industries, you want to nationalize them next, Comrade? We have too many soft people in this country anymore.

Yes, you need to be tough and suffer for the stock holders and PSR, and... I don't even know anymore.  

Such a weird flex. 

I'm not saying nationalization is a good idea, but the current system ain't doing too great either. 

[Euclid]

Overmod

 

 

Euclid

What would people say if management reached out to Labor and said that for the good of the industry, they were willing to make the changes needed to give the job acceptable conditions?

 

 

They'd say this:

 

followed by variations on "that'll be the sunny Friday".

Have you been reading Bellamy's "Looking Backward" recently?  He had a very similar premise...

 

Well that’s my point about why the problem cannot be fixed under the existing business model.  It needs a radical transformation.   But don’t get me wrong.  I am not advocating nationalization.  That would be the worst possible solution.    

 

But I have read many opinion articles about railroad management acting in total bad faith against Labor at every level.  This article by Alan Fisher makes most of those same points.  The only difference I find between his article and all the others is that he goes so far as to advocate nationalization as the solution. 

 

But in all those other articles, which do not mention nationalization, they make the same argument that management can never be trusted to treat Labor fairly.  Therefore, no apparent solution to the problem exists—except for nationalization.  It is the only thing I can think of that replaces the mindset of existing private sector management of the industry.

 

The only other solution would be new government regulations for better working conditions.  However, this would be a sweeping change that might bring the industry into gridlock.   

 

It also seems like the stars are aligned for nationalization at this particular moment in history.  Calls for nationalization will surely get the attention of government as they face the problem of the broken supply chain which must function correctly in the public interest.  A properly functioning of the U.S. railroads is part of government’s responsibility and duty.  Just look at how threatened the feel about this current threat of strike.   

[SD60MAC9500]

 

Flintlock76

 

 

SD60MAC9500

 

 

 

Flintlock76

Ever hear the old saying "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing?"

While the guy behind the video makes some point it's his "little knowledge" that bothers me a bit.  And not that I really  mind (I've been around) but his resorting to "potty words" to make some points makes me wonder about his grasp of this or other subjects. 

The "little knowledge" thing is the reason I keep my mouth shut when the professional railroaders on this Forum speak.  I just listen or ask a question and don't attempt to "quarterback."

And of course he's missed the fact that those 19th Century land grants had to be paid for, they weren'

 

 

 

 

 

 

SD60MAC9500

He then goes on to praise the USSR rail system without in depth knowledge of the system.

 

I wonder if he's one of those people who thinks Communism hasn't worked because it hasn't been tried by the "right people."

 

 

Oh he is.. I've watched a few video's by him. He thinks Communism is a mostly perfect system.....

 

 

[Flintlock76]

SD60MAC9500

Oh he is.. I've watched a few video's by him. He thinks Communism is a mostly perfect system.....

Well, there you go.

I wonder if he thinks he's the one to make it work?     

[charlie hebdo]

Perhaps this thread should be renamed "Disinformation Dump" as in total it's almost as bad as Quora.

[diningcar]

[quote user="charlie hebdo"]

Perhaps this thread should be renamed "Disinformation Dump" as in total it's almost as bad as Quora.

 The information regarding Land Grants is correct and may be verified.

 

[rixflix]

Funny how that guy is wrong every time he uses the words all or entirely.

Rick

[Murphy Siding]

    As I see it, the problems resolve around the idea of companies treating employees like replaceable cogs in a profit machine. Railroads are just like nearly every other big enterprise in this respect. All they have to do is put up a few posters that say "Our employees are our most valueble asset", and the problem is out of sight, out of mind. Once business owners can figure out how to make a buck by changing that attitude, things will change.

     From the outside looking in, it appears that to make life more tolerable for employees, they would have to hire more of them. That, in their minds, would cost too much. It's cheaper to just hire more of those replaceable cogs. How to fix that? I don't know. Nationalize the industry? No thanks. Would it give us a smoother running operation, like the post office? Would it treat the employees better, like the air traffic contollers? Would it be as efficient as the 6 man, 5 shovel crew that our city uses to fix a pothole in our streets? Improvements, yes. Nationalization, no.

[Euclid]

Murphy Siding

Improvements, yes. Nationalization, no.

What improvements are you referring to, and how could they be obtained?

[tree68]

Murphy Siding

 From the outside looking in, it appears that to make life more tolerable for employees, they would have to hire more of them. That, in their minds, would cost too much.

IMHO, the problem is who's driving the feeling that it would cost too much.

I completely understand that profit is a necessary thing.  Without it, no investment is worth anything.

The issue is that profit seems to be overriding service.  To some of today's investors, it's what they can get out of a company.  Today.  

I would suggest that your average, run-of-the-mill investor, who is in it for the long term (ie, retirement) is more interested in what the value of their investment will be worth some years down the road.  Such investors would be willing to give up a little of the profit to ensure that their investment continues to grow.

Yes there are small players who enjoy playing the stock market.  But one would think that the railroads would be regarded as a long-term investment, not a casino.

[BaltACD]

tree68

 

Murphy Siding

 From the outside looking in, it appears that to make life more tolerable for employees, they would have to hire more of them. That, in their minds, would cost too much. 

IMHO, the problem is who's driving the feeling that it would cost too much.

I completely understand that profit is a necessary thing.  Without it, no investment is worth anything.

The issue is that profit seems to be overriding service.  To some of today's investors, it's what they can get out of a company.  Today.  

I would suggest that your average, run-of-the-mill investor, who is in it for the long term (ie, retirement) is more interested in what the value of their investment will be worth some years down the road.  Such investors would be willing to give up a little of the profit to ensure that their investment continues to grow.

Yes there are small players who enjoy playing the stock market.  But one would think that the railroads would be regarded as a long-term investment, not a casino.

If only Wall Street were placed in the position of working in the manner that Operating and MofW personnel on the railroads endure, there may be some changes.  Since Wall Street exists on 6 hour days with multiple holidays thrown in - they have no concept of what working for a living on the railroad is all about.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

The New York Stock Exchange may only be open for six hours per day but the traders themselves and their support staffs put in longer hours than that covering after-hours trading and other exchanges globally.

Many traders do not have a long-term vision.  That's the problem.